Key evidence & numbers
| Classification in the study | Estimate | Scoring convention used |
|---|---|---|
| Low-imagery range | 3.9% | VVIQ total 16–32 |
| Complete reported absence | 0.8% | VVIQ total 16 |
| Dim or vague imagery within the low range | 3.1% | VVIQ total 17–32 |
The paper pools two samples of 502 participants. It identifies 39 people in the broader low-imagery range, including eight at the minimum total. This distinction matters because a broad low-imagery definition gives a different prevalence from requiring complete absence. The questionnaire orientation here uses lower totals for weaker imagery. Dance et al., 2022
What does the questionnaire measure?
The Vividness of Visual Imagery Questionnaire asks about subjective visual experience. Marks' original work introduced the measure; later aphantasia studies use it with explicit scoring conventions. Reversing a response scale changes the meaning of a total, so a cutoff should never be copied without checking the version. MARKS, 1973 Dance et al., 2022
Self-report is informative about experience, but it is not identical to a sensory-performance task or a direct brain measurement. Keogh and Pearson used a binocular-rivalry paradigm to investigate sensory imagery, illustrating how researchers can ask a related question with a different method. One measure does not automatically substitute for another. Keogh et al., 2018
Does aphantasia mean having no imagination?
No such broad conclusion follows. The research concerns particular imagery experiences, especially voluntary visual imagery. Zeman and colleagues' reports and the wider imagery review distinguish vividness extremes from all thinking, creativity or knowledge. A person can understand and reason about a scene without reporting a vivid internal picture. Zeman et al., 2015 Zeman et al., 2020 Pearson, 2019
What affects it?
What about memory and dreams?
Dawes and colleagues describe self-reported imagery, memory and dreaming profiles in people identifying with aphantasia. These are group patterns with substantial variation, not rules that every person has the same dream experience or memory difficulty. The measurement and recruitment method remain part of the interpretation. Dawes et al., 2020
Bainbridge and colleagues' drawing study found a distinction between object and spatial memory performance. It does not support saying that people without visual imagery have no visual memory or cannot represent spatial relationships. Different memory components need separate assessment. Bainbridge et al., 2021
Do age and sex define the prevalence?
In the pooled prevalence paper, female and male estimates did not differ statistically under the examined definitions. That is not proof of perfect equality in every population. The samples, their ages and the chosen cutoff limit generalisation; an online community devoted to imagery would have a different recruitment process. Dance et al., 2022
What can you realistically learn from an online test?
A questionnaire can help describe your reported imagery and clarify the words used for it. It should not turn a low score into a medical diagnosis or a claim about intelligence. The prevalence study's categories are research operationalisations, not a universal rule for every web questionnaire. Dance et al., 2022 MARKS, 1973
There is also no established training prescription in these sources that guarantees the creation of vivid imagery in someone who does not report it. The realistic use is understanding variation and the limits of the measurement, rather than promising a cure or an enhancement. Pearson, 2019 Zeman et al., 2020
The 3.9% and 0.8% figures are useful precisely when the definition travels with them. Removing that definition would make two different questions appear to have one contradictory answer. Dance et al., 2022
Try the related free test
Aphantasia test
Try the aphantasia questionnaire to explore how you describe voluntary visual imagery. Read its scale direction and keep the result as a self-report. The published percentages do not establish your diagnosis or a Helibrain population percentile.
Common questions
Is the prevalence 0.8% or 3.9%?
Both come from the same pooled study but use different definitions: complete reported absence versus the broader low-imagery range. Dance et al., 2022
Does aphantasia mean no dreams?
No universal rule follows. The cognitive-profile study reports variation in imagery and dreaming experiences. Dawes et al., 2020
Does weak imagery mean weak spatial memory?
Not necessarily. The drawing study distinguishes object from spatial memory rather than treating all memory as one ability. Bainbridge et al., 2021
Sources
- Dance et al. (2022). The prevalence of aphantasia (imagery weakness) in the general population.
- MARKS (1973). VISUAL IMAGERY DIFFERENCES IN THE RECALL OF PICTURES.
- Keogh et al. (2018). The blind mind: No sensory visual imagery in aphantasia.
- Zeman et al. (2015). Lives without imagery – Congenital aphantasia.
- Zeman et al. (2020). Phantasia–The psychological significance of lifelong visual imagery vividness extremes.
- Pearson (2019). The human imagination: the cognitive neuroscience of visual mental imagery.
- Dawes et al. (2020). A cognitive profile of multi-sensory imagery, memory and dreaming in aphantasia.
- Bainbridge et al. (2021). Quantifying aphantasia through drawing: Those without visual imagery show deficits in object but not spatial memory.
Explore your daily routines in Helibrain
The app has short tests of reaction time, working memory, self-control, reasoning and creativity. Retake them whenever you like, see your trend, and find habits that may help.
Start free in your browser
